Discussion Question #7

[captainjacksparrow]

Originally Posted by Karen 18th April 2004


I like Effie's question so much that I'd like for us to make it
today's question. Thanks so much Effie for bringing this to the
group!! It's a good one!



In the BBC Radio interview that Stephen Jeffreys gave he mentioned
that they were gearing up to begin production on TL in 1999 when Johnny
pulled out citing personal reasons (the personal reasons of course turning
out to be LR's birth). I find it interesting that he's come back to this role
5 years later – he clearly feels an affinity for the character – but what
I'm wondering (and I know this can only ever be conjecture on our
part, but I think it's interesting nonetheless) is, given that JD clearly
feels that LR's birth is the turning point in his life (the one the Earl never
got a chance to reach except when he already knew he was dying), do we
think he'll approach the character differently now than he would have if he'd
played it 5 years ago? Do we think the performance will be better for it?
I've got some thoughts on this but I'd like to hear what you've all got to
say.

[jeppody]

Karen


I think that Johnny has said that his life completely changed when
his first child was born and as an artist I can't help but believe
that his work would also be affected. This character is slowly
dying, and I think that there's a certain bit of bittersweetness
about the Earl that Johnny can now see. The Earl plainly loves his
children, all of them, and according to history reports, he had
Lizzie's child with him also for a bit. I think that his outlook
about children and what they mean to a parent, has to give him some
insight into what the Earl would be feeling. And therefore, yes
Effie, on many levels, I think that his performance will be better
served, a bit more coming from a soul that has known the love of a
child.

[jeppody]

Ellen


I'll give it a whirl. When you have children, EVERYTHING changes.
It seems that even your five senses take on a new life, with an
additional one added on: perception (my mom always said she had eyes
in the back of her head. When I had my children, I undertood what
she meant). I imagine JD looked at The Libertine five years later
with a whole new set of eyes. Things and feelings in the play that
he may have felt were secondary could now possibly be first and
foremost in his mind. That has the potential of a whole new play.
And a better one at that.

[jeppody]

Anne


I don't really know what to say, not that that
normally stops me! I'm just not sure about this one. What Effie and
you said obviously makes sense, but Johnny is such a good actor that
I'm not sure whether the change in his own circumstances would effect
the way he plays this one. If the film follows the play with just the
odd bit added, I don't know if it would give him much room for
interpretation, especially if they keep the dialogue the same. Which
reminds me, do you think they will keep it in Olde English or
modernise the speech?

[jeppody]

Ellen


Hi Anne. I'm gonna jump in here. I was pondering the same thing.
Before reading and discussing the play, I was hoping it would be
modernized. Now I'm totally opposite. I think anything but the
Olde English would cheapen it IMHO.

[jeppody]

Anne


I feel the same Ellen, but will the money people agree with us? They
may underestimate the public (whats new?) and decide they will get
fewer viewers if they leave it in the original format. The cinema
goers won't have my industrial strength dictionary with them, but it
should be unnecessary when they can see it on the screen. Fingers
crossed that authenticity wins the day!

[jeppody]

Effie


I think that there’s tremendous room for interpretation within this play.
Words on a page are just that after all – if they just wanted someone to
line read they wouldn’t have spent 7 years with JD being the only person
they considered able to bring the full force of this character to the
screen – remember that so much of the acting is unspoken, the way the
emphasis of a line is delivered. I agree with Karen that I think that extra
space of time and life experience will give a whole extra dimension to his
performance.

On the subject of the language, well I sincerely hope they’re not
modernising the speech – I doubt SJ would be as deeply involved if they were
adulterating his work to that extent, although they may simplify or clarify
the language in a few instances to make it more accessible.

[jeppody]

Anne


OK Effie, I concede to your intellect. Yes, Johnny will be sure to do
what Johnny does best. I have never acted in my life, so I guess I
just see the words, read them aloud and forget about all the pauses
between. I'd better go on an acting course I think if I'm going to be
any good at this!